Laserfiche WebLink
Regular Council Meeting <br /> May 14, 1991 <br /> page 7 <br /> The City's Comprehensive Plan calls for the property to be rezoned <br /> 2 and developed as a multi-family residential development. The <br /> preliminary plat has been reviewed by City staff and meets the <br /> requirements outlined by the applicable City ordinances . <br /> 5 At the April 16th Planning Commission meeting,' residents from the <br /> area of the proposed development expressed concerns regarding the <br /> potential need for additional parking as well as the potential of <br /> 9 increased traffic. The parking plans being proposed for the deve- <br /> �9 lopment were reviewed by the City Council . Councilmember Wagner <br /> 11 observed that the proposed parking was twice that required and that <br /> 12 widening of the driveways could be tonsidered. <br /> 13 Burt stated that City. staff continues to be sensitive to the needs <br /> i4. for drainage as well as the need for green areas. He noted that <br /> 15 presently there is no parking allowed on the west side of the street <br /> 16 but parallel parking could be a consideration. Councilmember Marks <br /> 17 felt the parking restriction on the west side of the street should <br /> 18 be reviewed and if there is no valid reason for it being kept in <br /> 19 place, it could be eliminated. Commissi-oner Madden suggested it may <br /> 20 have been a Fire Department requirement. <br /> 21 <br /> 22 Burt said the preliminary plans had been reviewed by the Fire Chief <br /> �3 and he saw no problems. Locations of fire hydrants will be addressed <br /> 24 when the plans are returned for final approval . Councilmember Enrooth <br /> 25 felt fire lanes should be a consideration in the final plans. <br /> ' • 26 <br /> 27 Marty Harstad advised that the plans were viewed by two surveyors <br /> 28 specifically with regard to parking needs. It was their opinion <br /> �9 that parallel parking would not really gain any additional parking <br /> 30 spaces.. <br /> 31 <br /> 32 Residents of nearby developments stated. they have no problems with <br /> 33 parking as presented on the plans , but did express concern that if <br /> 34 parking on both sides of the street were allowed, it could create <br /> 35 a hazardous condition. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 Burt said that traffic counts were done on Foss Road relative to the <br /> 38 numbers of vehicles which continue to travel north past the area. <br /> 39 The results of the counts showed that 65% stay on Foss Road and <br /> J10 there are few vehicles. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 Some concerns were expressed for parking when residents of the pro- <br /> 43 posed development host a party. Marty Harstad cited the average <br /> 44 property owner in his Coon Rapids development is not a "party" <br /> bq person. <br /> 46 <br /> 47 Motion by Marks , second by Enrooth to approve the preliminary plat <br /> 48 submitted by Forest and Marty Harstad for the development of two <br /> 49 eight-plex condominiums at 3816 Foss Road. <br /> So <br />